91 wins could easily take the central in 2010. The one thing in common with those 6 teams compared to the others is that they all had a solid DH who did not necessarily need to hit that many homers (Ortiz had the most among that group with 28 in little Fenway park), but was still solid. You could argue that the with the pitching staff we have we don't need that solid of a lineup, but if Hank Blalock and Andruw Jones didn't get it done with several good young pitchers and Kevin Millwood in a hitters park, or Jack Cust and Jason Giambi couldn't come close in a pitchers park with a ROY closer, several probably future all-star pitchers, and Matt Holliday protecting them, what makes us think that Jones and Mark Kotsay will come even close?

At this point I don't think that bringing in a slow guy to clog up the bases would be nearly as much of an issue as it would have been before the Juan Pierre trade. We have our speed. We have Pierre and Rios who can give us 30+ steals, and Beckham and Ramirez and even Vizquel could probably give us 15-20.

Point is, we have our speed. I think every good team needs a balance of everything, of pitching and fielding and power and contact and speed. If one of those elements is particularly stronger that the others, then one might not need to be quite as good. With the amount of pitching we have, our power numbers don't need to be as 2004-type high, but we still need to maintain that balance. In 2005, we had Scotty Pods stealing 60 bases, and a team ERA that led the league, but we also had Paulie hitting 40 homers. Right now we are banking too much on Quentin and Rios having comeback seasons putting up 20+ homers, and Beckham picking up where he left off last year. If those don't happen, Kotsay/Jones and our pitching won't be able to offset the black hole in the middle of our lineup.

That's why at this point I think it's time to bring in a solid, if not sure thing commmodity like Delgado or Blalock to at least give us some insurance, if anything.

JermaineDye05

01-22-2010, 04:05 PM

Look at the starting rotations for the majority of the teams with "multiple" DHs.

End Thread.

mzh

01-22-2010, 04:08 PM

Look at the starting rotations for the majority of the teams with "multiple" DHs.

End Thread.

Not saying that "multiple DH's" are the reason most of those teams suck, but that it definitely doesn't hurt, and that it's a trend that seems to go with winning.

Craig Grebeck

01-22-2010, 04:09 PM

Look at the starting rotations for the majority of the teams with "multiple" DHs.

End Thread.
Sigh. Come on. We have a good rotation. The Mariners do too, and the Yankees, and the Red Sox and the Rays and the Twins etc. etc. etc. Our offense is nowhere near those teams.

asindc

01-22-2010, 04:14 PM

Sigh. Come on. We have a good rotation. The Mariners do too, and the Yankees, and the Red Sox and the Rays and the Twins etc. etc. etc. Our offense is nowhere near those teams.

I think his point is that those teams in the bottom eight are there more because of their pitching rather than their DH situation. By the way, I assume you do not mean to include the Mariners as a team having a superior offense to ours.

JermaineDye05

01-22-2010, 04:14 PM

Sigh. Come on. We have a good rotation. The Mariners do too, and the Yankees, and the Red Sox and the Rays and the Twins etc. etc. etc. Our offense is nowhere near those teams.

I'm just pointing out that the argument is greatly flawed. Most of those teams weren't good because of their DH.

I mean Ortiz? Vlad? Burrell? Griffey?

If anything those players held back their teams offense last year. Not so much Vlad until the post season came round.

Don't get me wrong, I think this steam is at least an average DH away from a world series. However to say that these teams are winning because of the DH is ignorant.

EDIT: Don't mean to sound like I'm putting words in your mouth mzh. Sorry if it came out that way. I just feel there are way more variables that go into a winning team.

mzh

01-22-2010, 04:18 PM

I'm just pointing out that the argument is greatly flawed. Most of those teams weren't good because of their DH.

I mean Ortiz? Vlad? Burrell? Griffey?

If anything those players held back their teams offense last year. Not so much Vlad until the post season came round.

Don't get me wrong, I think this steam is at least an average DH away from a world series. However to say that these teams are winning because of the DH is ignorant.

As I said in my previous post, I'm not saying that those teams win because of their DH. I specifically said that a solid but not great DH could be a difference make on the sox.

DumpJerry

01-22-2010, 04:26 PM

Wouldn't multiple DHs make it difficult for the other team to prepare since they don't really know in advance to concentrate on?

mzh

01-22-2010, 04:30 PM

Wouldn't multiple DHs make it difficult for the other team to prepare since they don't really know in advance to concentrate on?

I suppose if we have a rotation of Carlos Quentin (2008 edition) and Andruw Jones (2006 Edition), that might work, but if your switching between Mark Kotsay and Jones right now, I don't see that making much of a difference

Craig Grebeck

01-22-2010, 04:31 PM

I suppose if we have a rotation of Carlos Quentin (2008 edition) and Andruw Jones (2006 Edition), that might work, but if your switching between Mark Kotsay and Jones right now, I don't see that making much of a difference
Not to mention there will be a pattern to their usage, i.e. righty/lefty/etc.

DumpJerry

01-22-2010, 04:33 PM

I suppose if we have a rotation of Carlos Quentin (2008 edition) and Andruw Jones (2006 Edition), that might work, but if your switching between Mark Kotsay and Jones right now, I don't see that making much of a difference
So, wouldn't that throw some cold water on the argument that platooning the DH position is a bad thing if there is not much of a difference between the guys doing it? Of course, it could prevent someone from locking into a hot streak.......

cws05champ

01-22-2010, 04:35 PM

Look at the starting rotations for the majority of the teams with "multiple" DHs.

End Thread.
Of the teams in the AL with the six best team ERA's last year, five of those teams did not make the playoffs (Seattle, Sox, Oakland, Detroit, Tampa Bay). Start Thread again... :D:

Coincidentally, the top four teams in runs scored in the AL last year made the playoffs.

You have to be able to pitch but in the AL you have to also score a lot. Now I don't care how we do it, but we have to score more than last year. I'm not sure we have a lineup so far to do that.

mzh

01-22-2010, 04:41 PM

So, wouldn't that throw some cold water on the argument that platooning the DH position is a bad thing if there is not much of a difference between the guys doing it? Of course, it could prevent someone from locking into a hot streak.......

What I meant is that If you are rotating 2 all-star players, the opposing team would have to take a specific game plan, but if they are two over the hill bench players it doesn't make a difference because they both suck.

russ99

01-22-2010, 07:07 PM

Of the teams in the AL with the six best team ERA's last year, five of those teams did not make the playoffs (Seattle, Sox, Oakland, Detroit, Tampa Bay). Start Thread again... :D:

Coincidentally, the top four teams in runs scored in the AL last year made the playoffs.

Runs scored, not home runs. There's a difference.

We have a lineup that will score runs, but not hit a lot of homers. I think that was Kenny's point.

Frater Perdurabo

01-22-2010, 07:26 PM

Runs scored, not home runs. There's a difference.

We have a lineup that will score runs, but not hit a lot of homers. I think that was Kenny's point.

I think a better way to phrase it is, "The Sox offense is designed to score runs even when it isn't hitting a lot of home runs."

mzh

01-22-2010, 08:19 PM

I think a better way to phrase it is, "The Sox offense is designed to score runs even when it isn't hitting a lot of home runs."

I don't see how we can score runs either way unless we have a proven hitter to hopefully offset a possible collapse from Quentin/Rios/Jones/Kotsay

Lillian

01-26-2010, 11:14 AM

Since the Sox play more games against their division rivals than any other teams, I thought it might be interesting to examine what kind of starting staffs they have. Almost all of the starters the Sox will face within the division are right handed. I count only 3 decent left handers among all of the starters on our 4 division opponents. Even the bullpens are almost all right handed. And the Sox do not have a potent left handed bat. Not good!!!

I don't think that the focus should necessarily be upon the DH, but they better find a good left handed hitter with some power to bat somewhere in the middle of the order. Maybe they need to trade one of the right handed hitters, most likely Konerko. Going with almost an entirely right handed hitting offense against the division's predominantly right handed staffs is not a good plan.

doublem23

01-26-2010, 11:19 AM

I think a better way to phrase it is, "The Sox offense is designed to score runs even when it isn't hitting a lot of home runs."

The Sox offense right now is just not designed to hit a lot of HR. That doesn't mean they're going to be scoring any other runs.

mzh

01-27-2010, 05:03 PM

Since the Sox play more games against their division rivals than any other teams, I thought it might be interesting to examine what kind of starting staffs they have. Almost all of the starters the Sox will face within the division are right handed. I count only 3 decent left handers among all of the starters on our 4 division opponents. Even the bullpens are almost all right handed. And the Sox do not have a potent left handed bat. Not good!!!

I don't think that the focus should necessarily be upon the DH, but they better find a good left handed hitter with some power to bat somewhere in the middle of the order. Maybe they need to trade one of the right handed hitters, most likely Konerko. Going with almost an entirely right handed hitting offense against the division's predominantly right handed staffs is not a good plan.

I hadn't thought of that. Either way, with Vlad off the market, all of the available big bats that the sox should be interested in are lefties anyway. I think that if Delgado would sign for the same as Thome, maybe slightly more given he is a year removed from an MVP-type season. I would spend $2 mil on him, mostly incentive laden. Of course Damon is still preferable if he drops to the $3-5 mil range. People also talk about Blalock being a K machine, given the rate Andruw Jones strikes out at I don't see how he could be any worse.

WhiteSox5187

01-27-2010, 05:23 PM

I don't see how we can score runs either way unless we have a proven hitter to hopefully offset a possible collapse from Quentin/Rios/Jones/Kotsay

This is what frightens me, if you could tell me right now that Konerko, Rios and Quentin will all stay healthy (and that Quentin and Rios can return to the mean of their career) I'd say we're fine offensively. But that's taking a big gamble to count all of them. There is no reason why Konerko can't repeat his 2009 season of course, but there is also no reason why he can't repeat his 2008 season. Quentin has never stayed healthy for a full year and Rios looked absolutely lost last year. As to Jones and Kotsay, boy, that's a BIG gamble counting on them for solid offensive production. I've often lamented the lack of team speed on the Sox, this year I think we have plenty of speed, but now I worry as to whether or not we have enough power. The key to a successful offense is balance, and I'm not so sure how balanced we are right now.

Thome25

01-27-2010, 09:02 PM

I got tired of arguing about my insecurity with a rotating DH, so I looked up these numbers. 6 American League teams had a player who started 100 or more games at DH.

91 wins could easily take the central in 2010. The one thing in common with those 6 teams compared to the others is that they all had a solid DH who did not necessarily need to hit that many homers (Ortiz had the most among that group with 28 in little Fenway park), but was still solid. You could argue that the with the pitching staff we have we don't need that solid of a lineup, but if Hank Blalock and Andruw Jones didn't get it done with several good young pitchers and Kevin Millwood in a hitters park, or Jack Cust and Jason Giambi couldn't come close in a pitchers park with a ROY closer, several probably future all-star pitchers, and Matt Holliday protecting them, what makes us think that Jones and Mark Kotsay will come even close?

At this point I don't think that bringing in a slow guy to clog up the bases would be nearly as much of an issue as it would have been before the Juan Pierre trade. We have our speed. We have Pierre and Rios who can give us 30+ steals, and Beckham and Ramirez and even Vizquel could probably give us 15-20.

Point is, we have our speed. I think every good team needs a balance of everything, of pitching and fielding and power and contact and speed. If one of those elements is particularly stronger that the others, then one might not need to be quite as good. With the amount of pitching we have, our power numbers don't need to be as 2004-type high, but we still need to maintain that balance. In 2005, we had Scotty Pods stealing 60 bases, and a team ERA that led the league, but we also had Paulie hitting 40 homers. Right now we are banking too much on Quentin and Rios having comeback seasons putting up 20+ homers, and Beckham picking up where he left off last year. If those don't happen, Kotsay/Jones and our pitching won't be able to offset the black hole in the middle of our lineup.

That's why at this point I think it's time to bring in a solid, if not sure thing commmodity like Delgado or Blalock to at least give us some insurance, if anything.

Could said DHs also pitch for the respective teams in each group? Pitching and defense win games NOT whether or not you have a full-time DH.

Craig Grebeck

01-27-2010, 09:04 PM

Could said DHs also pitch for the respective teams in each group? Pitching and defense win games NOT whether or not you have a full-time DH.
Offense is as important.

Tragg

01-27-2010, 11:02 PM

What's the record of teams who rotated the DH between among their utility infielders?

voodoochile

01-27-2010, 11:15 PM

What's the record of teams who rotated the DH between among their utility infielders?

I don't know...

What was their team ERA's?

What was the starting 7 position players' combined OPS?

How many All-Stars did they have on average?

What was their average team budget?

How many 15 game winners did they have in the starting rotation?

Seems to me all of these issues would factor into team record as much if not more than who the DH was, but at the least they are equally important, so I don't think you can break down team success to "who was their DH"?

Tragg

01-27-2010, 11:33 PM

so I don't think you can break down team success to "who was their DH"?
When your DH is a utility infielder, it's safe to assume that, in most cases, you aren't making a serious effort to win and that those who have done it haven't won. I did see a game in Seattle once where the Twins (the eventual division champs) used Offerman as DH, but I don't think that that was a regular occurence.
The Sox are a little different - they certainly are trying to win, but it's the result of the combination of a little budget strain, Guillen's funny ideas on offense and Guillen's weaknesses/blind-spots in talent evaluation.
With such a fine starting staff as we have, to back it up with mediocre defense and mediocre O is just hard to figure.
Hopefully, this is just Guillen rhetoric and they have plans to get a real hitter in here.

guillen4life13

01-28-2010, 12:15 AM

I'm sensing a strong possibility that Tyler Flowers will make the squad out of spring training. If money weren't an object, I'd go for Damon, Hudson or Lopez as my top targets with one or two year deals. But I'd be happy with Flowers getting part time play in the bigs while picking A.J., the staff, and Coop's minds.

chunk

01-28-2010, 12:36 AM

I think a better way to phrase it is, "The Sox offense is designed to score runs even when it isn't hitting a lot of home runs."

A lineup that is built around Juan Pierre at lead off, a sub .740 (and that's generous) DH, and counting on bouncebacks from two of the outfielders is not designed to score runs.

Domeshot17

01-28-2010, 12:58 AM

There is also a false belief that Hitting Home runs is a bad thing. 5 teams hit 200 Home runs last year. 4 made the playoffs. One was just the bad luck of being in the AL East (Toronto).

The Sox offense is not designed to score a lot of runs. It just doesn't have the fire power. The better offenses hit doubles AND home runs, they don't trade one for the other. The Sox have. They Sox could very well finish the season without a 100 RBI hitter or a 30 homer hitter, and if that happens, we won't make the playoffs.

There is this big freaking cocky idea here all we have to do is show up and win because we have good pitching. We have good pitching so we can totally ignore the offensive end of baseball.

We either get CC-Burnett (best of Javy/Joba/Pettite) and an Offense that can score runs against any pitcher

or we get

Beckett-Lester-Lackey, probably the best 1-3 in baseball, with an offense again FAR SUPERIOR to ours

and If somehow we get to Seattle, We face the best 1-2 in all of baseball with Felix and Lee. The offense of the 2 teams are fairly comparable, both require a lot of of moving guys over, small ball, speed, neither has any firepower.

Out of the 4 teams, the White Sox are pretty obviously the weakest defensive unit all around.

My point is, Good pitching is all over the AL. Peavy, Buehrle, Danks, those 3 can hang with any of those teams. But Peavy is just a coin flip with Felix CC and Beckett and Buehrle probably is 3rd best in the group of Lee Lester and Burnett, but a good deal behind Lee and Lester (One has won an AL Cy Young, and one looks like he will pretty soon).

I think this is the concern some of us have. This pitching staff, IT CAN COMPETE WITH ANYONE. This bullpen, if it gets right, can be as good as any in the AL. But these 2 statements can be said about Boston, New York, Seattle. Minnesota's bullpen is as deep as anyones and that can cover for a weaker rotation.

Some of us feel it is important to run the STRONGEST POSSIBLE 1-9 everyday, and especially in the playoffs, because other teams are just as strong as we are. The Kotsay/Jones platoon, I don't care WHERE THEY PLAY, are going to be in the lineup as an everyday starter. That isn't the strongest 1-9, that isn't giving us the best chance to win. Hopefully we aren't done, but Ozzie is not talking like a someone posturing. He was incredibly defensive all weekend at Soxfest, and went so far to say that no one the Sox sign or trade for will be a full time player. He seems to really believe Kotsay and Jones give us the best chance to win. And for some, it just feels like Erstad, Mackowiak etc. all over again.

oeo

01-28-2010, 03:29 AM

What's more interesting to me is how most of those DH's suck (both part time and full time). Either we've had it good for a number of years at the position, or the DH as we've known it is dying.

mzh

01-28-2010, 10:21 AM

there is also a false belief that hitting home runs is a bad thing. 5 teams hit 200 home runs last year. 4 made the playoffs. One was just the bad luck of being in the al east (toronto).

The sox offense is not designed to score a lot of runs. It just doesn't have the fire power. The better offenses hit doubles and home runs, they don't trade one for the other. The sox have. They sox could very well finish the season without a 100 rbi hitter or a 30 homer hitter, and if that happens, we won't make the playoffs.

There is this big freaking cocky idea here all we have to do is show up and win because we have good pitching. We have good pitching so we can totally ignore the offensive end of baseball.

We either get cc-burnett (best of javy/joba/pettite) and an offense that can score runs against any pitcher

or we get

beckett-lester-lackey, probably the best 1-3 in baseball, with an offense again far superior to ours

and if somehow we get to seattle, we face the best 1-2 in all of baseball with felix and lee. The offense of the 2 teams are fairly comparable, both require a lot of of moving guys over, small ball, speed, neither has any firepower.

Out of the 4 teams, the white sox are pretty obviously the weakest defensive unit all around.

My point is, good pitching is all over the al. Peavy, buehrle, danks, those 3 can hang with any of those teams. But peavy is just a coin flip with felix cc and beckett and buehrle probably is 3rd best in the group of lee lester and burnett, but a good deal behind lee and lester (one has won an al cy young, and one looks like he will pretty soon).

I think this is the concern some of us have. This pitching staff, it can compete with anyone. This bullpen, if it gets right, can be as good as any in the al. But these 2 statements can be said about boston, new york, seattle. Minnesota's bullpen is as deep as anyones and that can cover for a weaker rotation.

Some of us feel it is important to run the strongest possible 1-9 everyday, and especially in the playoffs, because other teams are just as strong as we are. The kotsay/jones platoon, i don't care where they play, are going to be in the lineup as an everyday starter. That isn't the strongest 1-9, that isn't giving us the best chance to win. Hopefully we aren't done, but ozzie is not talking like a someone posturing. He was incredibly defensive all weekend at soxfest, and went so far to say that no one the sox sign or trade for will be a full time player. He seems to really believe kotsay and jones give us the best chance to win. And for some, it just feels like erstad, mackowiak etc. All over again.

+1

asindc

01-28-2010, 11:23 AM

There is also a false belief that Hitting Home runs is a bad thing. 5 teams hit 200 Home runs last year. 4 made the playoffs. One was just the bad luck of being in the AL East (Toronto).

The Sox offense is not designed to score a lot of runs. It just doesn't have the fire power. The better offenses hit doubles AND home runs, they don't trade one for the other. The Sox have. They Sox could very well finish the season without a 100 RBI hitter or a 30 homer hitter, and if that happens, we won't make the playoffs.

There is this big freaking cocky idea here all we have to do is show up and win because we have good pitching. We have good pitching so we can totally ignore the offensive end of baseball.

We either get CC-Burnett (best of Javy/Joba/Pettite) and an Offense that can score runs against any pitcher

or we get

Beckett-Lester-Lackey, probably the best 1-3 in baseball, with an offense again FAR SUPERIOR to ours

and If somehow we get to Seattle, We face the best 1-2 in all of baseball with Felix and Lee. The offense of the 2 teams are fairly comparable, both require a lot of of moving guys over, small ball, speed, neither has any firepower.

Out of the 4 teams, the White Sox are pretty obviously the weakest defensive unit all around.

My point is, Good pitching is all over the AL. Peavy, Buehrle, Danks, those 3 can hang with any of those teams. But Peavy is just a coin flip with Felix CC and Beckett and Buehrle probably is 3rd best in the group of Lee Lester and Burnett, but a good deal behind Lee and Lester (One has won an AL Cy Young, and one looks like he will pretty soon).

I think this is the concern some of us have. This pitching staff, IT CAN COMPETE WITH ANYONE. This bullpen, if it gets right, can be as good as any in the AL. But these 2 statements can be said about Boston, New York, Seattle. Minnesota's bullpen is as deep as anyones and that can cover for a weaker rotation.

Some of us feel it is important to run the STRONGEST POSSIBLE 1-9 everyday, and especially in the playoffs, because other teams are just as strong as we are. The Kotsay/Jones platoon, I don't care WHERE THEY PLAY, are going to be in the lineup as an everyday starter. That isn't the strongest 1-9, that isn't giving us the best chance to win. Hopefully we aren't done, but Ozzie is not talking like a someone posturing. He was incredibly defensive all weekend at Soxfest, and went so far to say that no one the Sox sign or trade for will be a full time player. He seems to really believe Kotsay and Jones give us the best chance to win. And for some, it just feels like Erstad, Mackowiak etc. all over again.

1) Please direct me to the post(s) where anyone has stated the first two ideas bolded above.

2) He seems to really believe Kotsay and Jones give us a better chance to win than Thome would have, true. You strongly disagree with that. Understood, once again.

oeo

01-28-2010, 12:12 PM

There is also a false belief that Hitting Home runs is a bad thing. 5 teams hit 200 Home runs last year. 4 made the playoffs. One was just the bad luck of being in the AL East (Toronto).

The Sox offense is not designed to score a lot of runs. It just doesn't have the fire power. The better offenses hit doubles AND home runs, they don't trade one for the other. The Sox have. They Sox could very well finish the season without a 100 RBI hitter or a 30 homer hitter, and if that happens, we won't make the playoffs.

There is this big freaking cocky idea here all we have to do is show up and win because we have good pitching. We have good pitching so we can totally ignore the offensive end of baseball.

We either get CC-Burnett (best of Javy/Joba/Pettite) and an Offense that can score runs against any pitcher

or we get

Beckett-Lester-Lackey, probably the best 1-3 in baseball, with an offense again FAR SUPERIOR to ours

and If somehow we get to Seattle, We face the best 1-2 in all of baseball with Felix and Lee. The offense of the 2 teams are fairly comparable, both require a lot of of moving guys over, small ball, speed, neither has any firepower.

Out of the 4 teams, the White Sox are pretty obviously the weakest defensive unit all around.

My point is, Good pitching is all over the AL. Peavy, Buehrle, Danks, those 3 can hang with any of those teams. But Peavy is just a coin flip with Felix CC and Beckett and Buehrle probably is 3rd best in the group of Lee Lester and Burnett, but a good deal behind Lee and Lester (One has won an AL Cy Young, and one looks like he will pretty soon).

I think this is the concern some of us have. This pitching staff, IT CAN COMPETE WITH ANYONE. This bullpen, if it gets right, can be as good as any in the AL. But these 2 statements can be said about Boston, New York, Seattle. Minnesota's bullpen is as deep as anyones and that can cover for a weaker rotation.

Some of us feel it is important to run the STRONGEST POSSIBLE 1-9 everyday, and especially in the playoffs, because other teams are just as strong as we are. The Kotsay/Jones platoon, I don't care WHERE THEY PLAY, are going to be in the lineup as an everyday starter. That isn't the strongest 1-9, that isn't giving us the best chance to win. Hopefully we aren't done, but Ozzie is not talking like a someone posturing. He was incredibly defensive all weekend at Soxfest, and went so far to say that no one the Sox sign or trade for will be a full time player. He seems to really believe Kotsay and Jones give us the best chance to win. And for some, it just feels like Erstad, Mackowiak etc. all over again.

Look, I agree as much as the next guy that our offense is weak, but none of this means jack when October rolls around. It's about who's hot and who's not. The best team doesn't always win, the worst team doesn't always get swept. The Yankees, who were dominant all year, were not exactly dominant in the postseason. Why? Because it's a different ballgame. The 2008 Cubs were, by far, the best team in the NL and did absolutely nothing in the postseason.

I'm ready for the season to start. I'm not happy about the offense, but it is what it is and complaining about it everyday won't make it better. Put the questions to rest, let's play ball and see what this team is capable of.

Domeshot17

01-28-2010, 12:48 PM

Look, I agree as much as the next guy that our offense is weak, but none of this means jack when October rolls around. It's about who's hot and who's not. The best team doesn't always win, the worst team doesn't always get swept. The Yankees, who were dominant all year, were not exactly dominant in the postseason. Why? Because it's a different ballgame. The 2008 Cubs were, by far, the best team in the NL and did absolutely nothing in the postseason.

I'm ready for the season to start. I'm not happy about the offense, but it is what it is and complaining about it everyday won't make it better. Put the questions to rest, let's play ball and see what this team is capable of.

I don't understand really. Should the board just stay silent until spring training? Is that what you are suggesting? Or we should all post nothing but "Alex Rios is going to be an all star, Beckham is better than Longoria, Quentin has the MVP in the bag" ?

This is a legitimate concern. And Yes, the best teams usually do win in October. Eventually hot streaks run out. See the D Rays, the Rockies etc. The only real small example is the Cardinals, but that had more to do with HEALTH and getting guys back at seasons end then anything else.

The truth is there, even if we can win a pathetically bad AL Central, we are fighting seattle for the 3rd best team in the playoffs, and all 3 teams match up REALLY WELL against us, which is not a good thing. It doesn't mean we can't win, but as plenty of us are saying... we can either try and take care of this problem, or we can hope for the best. Some of us are action people, not talk and hope.

dickallen15

01-28-2010, 12:57 PM

I saw this today and it was pretty interesting. Jim Thome had the second highest OPS of all DH's in 2009. Only Lind was higher. Thome had a better year than Matsui and Matsui got $6.5 million, and he can't play the field either.

oeo

01-28-2010, 01:06 PM

I don't understand really. Should the board just stay silent until spring training? Is that what you are suggesting? Or we should all post nothing but "Alex Rios is going to be an all star, Beckham is better than Longoria, Quentin has the MVP in the bag" ?

This is a legitimate concern. And Yes, the best teams usually do win in October. Eventually hot streaks run out. See the D Rays, the Rockies etc. The only real small example is the Cardinals, but that had more to do with HEALTH and getting guys back at seasons end then anything else.

The truth is there, even if we can win a pathetically bad AL Central, we are fighting seattle for the 3rd best team in the playoffs, and all 3 teams match up REALLY WELL against us, which is not a good thing. It doesn't mean we can't win, but as plenty of us are saying... we can either try and take care of this problem, or we can hope for the best. Some of us are action people, not talk and hope.

I didn't suggest anything. I just said I'm ready for a new flavor, this one sucks.

The Rays were just a hot streak? Uh...they were the second best team in baseball, they won 97 games. The Phillies were the fifth best team in that postseason behind the Angels, Tampa Bay, Boston, and the Cubs. It didn't matter. It didn't matter that their pitching was pretty much ****. They got hot and won the thing. Year after year, you see the Wild Card either getting to the World Series or winning it. That's not even the best team in a division. The playoffs are a crapshoot, just consider yourself lucky if you're healthy and playing well.

'Matching up' is all relative to the time. Who's healthy? Who's not? Who's playing extremely well? Who has the ball bouncing their way? To make these types of predictions of the playoffs in late January is quite ridiculous. What if the Yankees have a plethora of injuries and don't even make the playoffs? What if the entire Red Sox rotation has a down year? This is silly, there's still 162 games to be played and we're talking about match ups in the playoffs?!

soxinem1

01-28-2010, 02:28 PM

Wasn't it Ken Williams who stated when Thome was first aquired that they needed up upgrade the offense from the 2005 team? He strongly implied that repeating with the same team (ala, low runs scored total) was not likely.

That team was ninth in runs. Last season they were 12th.

Now he is going along with Ozzie's idea that you can depend on a guy who has hit less than .200 the past two years, a 42-year old INF, and a backup outfielder who played for four teams in the last three seasons are the primary cogs of a DH rotation?

True, Jones can bounce back and produce, but Thome hitting 25-30 HR is more likely, even in a reduced role, than depending on Jones to even come close to that.

And Kotsay has NEVER been even more than decent production-wise.

I applaud the effort to make the team more versatile, but the glaring hole known as a power LH bat is still there barely three weeks from ST.

HBaines03

01-28-2010, 02:38 PM

I have been reading alot about the concerns of the 2010 offense as it is today, and to some degree I agree and I disagree. As a lifelong White Sox fan, 2005 is the measure of any team from here on out. Since 2005, I have been disappointed in many of our teams as I thought we could have played better than we did. So I decided to compare the 2005 WS Champs offensive output to White Sox teams of the past 10 years.

The 2005 White Sox had the 3rd lowest HR output & 3rd lowest runs scored output of any White Sox team since 1999. Yes, the 2005 team hit 200 HR's. Only the 2007 & 2009 teams were worse in both categories. The 2005 team did however have the highest stolen base total since 1999 and tied for the best fielding percentage over that same span. What does this say.....absolutely nothing!

Overall, the 2005 team was not an offensive juggernaut, but they were a timely hitting team that took advantages when they were they to be taken. Since 2005, I have watched as many of our teams could not score with bases loaded or 2nd & 3rd and no outs. It seemed as if the hitters were swinging for the fences instead of just trying to make solid contact and driving in runs. The mindset and actions of the 2005 team were very opportunistic. I agree that good teams need a balance between power and speed but even if you are overloaded to one direction I think you can win alot of games if you understand the situation and try not to do to much. Get on base, move runners to get them in scoring position and drive them in when they are there.